NS Military Realism Consultation Thread

[The UK in Exile]

also thinking that it would be possible to build a Godrod interceptor that would either disrupt terminal guidance or cause the rod itself to shear.

1) Rods From God...

2) I wouldn't leave the rocket guidance system unprotected. That is messy work...

3) The rod is pure tungsten.

ke rounds are too. you can shear them.

i didn't say damage, i said disrupt.

[Xanixi]

Disrupt would mean that you managed to take control of the system. That's what I meant by protected: it isn't easy.

As for the other one, OK, I suppose, but still. Everything has it's weakness, right? I'll find some way to eliminate that later.

[The Kievan People]

I have a question.

Basically, my friend hhas this weapon which fires a tungsten rod which travels at 6 miles per second. As this object is fired towards its target, it picks up kinetic energy, it then hits the earth and releases the energy outwards.

What i want to know is, will the force be released outwards, or would it be projected downwards?

Note:No explosives are involved.

Notthisshitagain.

Downward.

Rods from god waste almost all of their destructive potential because the majority of the energy goes straight into the ground, but the rods are traveling so fast they begin to vaporize on impact. So they don't much against targets on the surface (most of the energy absorbed by the ground) and can't penetrate deep enough to reach the toughest bunkers (disintegrate before they can reach them).

And nuclear comparable? dream on.

One kiloton tips the scale at 4.184 terajoules. With an 8km/s impact velocity you'd need a "rod" weighing about 130,000kg to equal that.

[Velociraptors]

Heehee. A velociraptor the size of a utahraptor.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

God Rods are in fact shit, I will give you a number of reasons.

1. Anti-Satellite Missiles. They can be launched from the ground, from ships, and even from fighters (the US military shot down a dead satellite with an F-15). The former two ways can be countered, but short of shooting down the fighter or bomber, killing air launched ASAT missiles isn't easy.

2. Inaccuracy. Okay, get a dart, a dartboard, and a tree or house. Place the dart board at the base of the tree or house and climb to the top while carrying the dart. Carefully line up the dart with the board and when you are ready drop the dart. Did you make a perfect bullseye? If you did you are really lucky, if you didn't it is because there are lots of factors effecting the accuracy of the dart, largely wind. Now lets scale it up, make the dart as big as a telephone pole, make the target the size of a house, and drop it from space. At this point it isn't so much like hitting a dart board from the roof of your house as it is threading a needle from the roof of your house. Your god rod has no guidance system or way to actually change course, and due to the effects of the atmosphere it will miss anything bigger than a city block horribly.

3. Serves no purpose. It doesn't do anything that existing systems cannot do. Destroy bunkers? Have bunker busters, hell we had bombs the size of a yacht during WW2 that could destroy a well built bunker today. Destroy a city? It cannot do that and even if it could it would have no advantage over nukes. Hit a tank? Even if you could a guided missile would work just as well.

4. Cost. Putting objects in space isn't cheap, putting an entire military base is even less cheap. Not much more to say, it is just a ton of money for little gain (even if the system worked as well as video games claimed).

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Heehee. A velociraptor the size of a utahraptor.

It is a member of the subfamily Velociraptorine, not a Velociraptor. Calling all Veloceraptorine Velociraptors is like calling all Homininae Humans. Just a note, the Homininae subfamily includes gorillas. And I will be damned if I am tossed in with gorillas like we are the same species. My ancestors worked hard not getting killed and managing to reproduce, resulting in the current traits I carry. Damn hard.

[Senestrum]

I have a question.

Basically, my friend hhas this weapon which fires a tungsten rod which travels at 6 miles per second. As this object is fired towards its target, it picks up kinetic energy, it then hits the earth and releases the energy outwards.

What i want to know is, will the force be released outwards, or would it be projected downwards?

Note:No explosives are involved.

Notthisshitagain.

Downward.

Rods from god waste almost all of their destructive potential because the majority of the energy goes straight into the ground, but the rods are traveling so fast they begin to vaporize on impact. So they don't much against targets on the surface (most of the energy absorbed by the ground) and can't penetrate deep enough to reach the toughest bunkers (disintegrate before they can reach them).

And nuclear comparable? dream on.

One kiloton tips the scale at 4.184 terajoules. With an 8km/s impact velocity you'd need a "rod" weighing about 130,000kg to equal that.

Also, the other terribad thing about them? Launch costs. The best-described system had projectiles weighing nearly eight tonnes; keep in mind that costs per kilogram to orbit generally start at a few thousand dollars per kilogram and proceed to go up from there.

[Xanixi]

God Rods are in fact shit, I will give you a number of reasons.

1. Anti-Satellite Missiles. They can be launched from the ground, from ships, and even from fighters (the US military shot down a dead satellite with an F-15). The former two ways can be countered, but short of shooting down the fighter or bomber, killing air launched ASAT missiles isn't easy. Yes, but I have that covered. I already said that before.

2. Inaccuracy. Okay, get a dart, a dartboard, and a tree or house. Place the dart board at the base of the tree or house and climb to the top while carrying the dart. Carefully line up the dart with the board and when you are ready drop the dart. Did you make a perfect bullseye? If you did you are really lucky, if you didn't it is because there are lots of factors effecting the accuracy of the dart, largely wind. Yep, wind is a bitch in space. Now lets scale it up, make the dart as big as a telephone pole, make the target the size of a house, and drop it from space. At this point it isn't so much like hitting a dart board from the roof of your house as it is threading a needle from the roof of your house. Your god rod has no guidance system or way to actually change course ...It does. It has a rocket booster. Said that. In a box., and due to the effects of the atmosphere it will miss anything bigger than a city block horribly.

3. Serves no purpose. It doesn't do anything that existing systems cannot do. Destroy bunkers? Have bunker busters, hell we had bombs the size of a yacht during WW2 that could destroy a well built bunker today. Destroy a city? It cannot do that and even if it could it would have no advantage over nukes Except, you know, radiation.. Hit a tank? Even if you could a guided missile would work just as well. Project Thor could, in theory, make a that be a small scale tactical nuclear weapon. I wouldn't waste that on a tank...

4. Cost. Putting objects in space isn't cheap, putting an entire military base is even less cheap Think you meant more expensive?. Not much more to say, it is just a ton of money for little gain If you protect it well (which I do), then you get a major military advantage. YOU KNOW. (even if the system worked as well as video games claimed).

Ahem!

I have a question.

Basically, my friend hhas this weapon which fires a tungsten rod which travels at 6 miles per second. As this object is fired towards its target, it picks up kinetic energy, it then hits the earth and releases the energy outwards.

What i want to know is, will the force be released outwards, or would it be projected downwards?

Note:No explosives are involved.

Notthisshitagain.

Downward.

Rods from god waste almost all of their destructive potential because the majority of the energy goes straight into the ground, but the rods are traveling so fast they begin to vaporize on impact. So they don't much against targets on the surface (most of the energy absorbed by the ground) and can't penetrate deep enough to reach the toughest bunkers (disintegrate before they can reach them). The game explains it as a rocket booster in the back of the rod "drives" it all the way to it's target, gaining some major kinetic energy on the way there. By the time it hits the ground, it's gained enough kinetic energy to be comparable to a small scale tactical nuclear weapon.

Read this, "The rods are made of Tungsten, and on their tip is a heat shielding material, most likely reinforced Carbon-Carbon." I dunno, thought you might think that was important.

Anyway, it's massive size (A 20 foot telephone pole, 1 foot diameter), coupled with the speed, causes the crust to crack, spewing dirt and tearing up the ground as the shockwave travels.

And nuclear comparable? dream on.

One kiloton tips the scale at 4.184 terajoules. With an 8km/s impact velocity you'd need a "rod" weighing about 130,000kg to equal that. Can you do those measurements? What would a tungsten rod, 20 feet in length, 1 foot diameter, weigh?

[Lubyak]

Care to explain how you hand waved away all forms of anti-satellite missile? Because that's what I'm curious about.

And others--far more qualified than me--have already listed the many reasons Rods from God are complete and utter shit. Given that, what is the major military advantage you're talking about? At this point, your project is even more wasteful than Project Thor would have been because not only have you wasted the money putting up insanely heavy objects in space, but you've also wasted the money constructing some kind of elaborate defense system for said satellites, praying that this will somehow stop every ASAT.

Somehow I feel it's cheaper for me to just keep out churning enough ASATs to beat your defense system than for you to keep building this mystical defense system.

The biggest advantage you get with satellite networks is reconaissance and navigation.

Also, the problem isn't the fact that there's wind in space, moreso than you're launching from space and then have to fly through the entire bloody atmosphere.

[Licana]

Maybe it would have the impact force of a nuclear explosion, the difference being that all of that energy goes into the ground, giving you a downright pathetic destructive radius. So, at best, you'll get the destructive capabilites of a cruise missile for something that costs wayy more than a ballistic missile, and probably has a CEP greater than it's destructive radius (and this is with whatever lulzy rocket booster you have). It serves literally no point, and no mater what Anti-ASAT countermeasures you employ to stop them, someone could just spam cheaper ASAT missiles until they knock your satellites out of the sky. There's also the cost of moving these systems into space, moving and probably constructing the firing platforms in space, moving and possible constructing the defensive constalation in space, and ressupplying these systems. By the time this is all done, you've just wasted trillions of dollars to get a system that has no strategic or tactical value.

As for professionalism, godrods are, in the most professional terms possible, complete and utter shit.

[Halgrond]

Is there any guide to building your military?

[Velociraptors]

Heehee. A velociraptor the size of a utahraptor.

It is a member of the subfamily Velociraptorine, not a Velociraptor. Calling all Veloceraptorine Velociraptors is like calling all Homininae Humans. Just a note, the Homininae subfamily includes gorillas. And I will be damned if I am tossed in with gorillas like we are the same species. My ancestors worked hard not getting killed and managing to reproduce, resulting in the current traits I carry. Damn hard.

Taken from that page.
Subfamily: †Velociraptorinae
Barsbold, 1983

Type species
Velociraptor mongoliensis



Taken from the human page.
Homo sapiens
Linnaeus, 1758

Subspecies
†Homo sapiens idaltu
Homo sapiens sapiens

[Xanixi]

Care to explain how you hand waved away all forms of anti-satellite missile? Because that's what I'm curious about. I didn't. Bwitain didn't ask if having the satellite is effective, he asked if it was possible.

And others--far more qualified than me--have already listed the many reasons Rods from God are complete and utter shit. Given that, what is the major military advantage you're talking about? In the event that I am capable of protecting the satellite from ASATs, It would be a satellite carrying weapons. Orbital weapons, strong or otherwise, are always an advantage. Even when exposed. At this point, your project is even more wasteful than Project Thor would have been because not only have you wasted the money putting up insanely heavy objects in space, but you've also wasted the money constructing some kind of elaborate defense system for said satellites, praying that this will somehow stop every ASAT.

Somehow I feel it's cheaper for me to just keep out churning enough ASATs to beat your defense system than for you to keep building this mystical defense system. You know, you say "mystical" with such confidence. I haven't elaborated on what the defense system is because no one asked. You're the first one to. Why is it mystical if I have yet to have to answer anyone's question?

The biggest advantage you get with satellite networks is reconaissance and navigation.

Also, the problem isn't the fact that there's wind in space, moreso than you're launching from space and then have to fly through the entire bloody atmosphere. It's rocket guided. I would understand his point if it didn't, because its true. I would have never invested my time in this project if it wasn't guided. Too far a distance to hit accurately: I understand. But it is guided, and thus, worth my investment.

The "mystical" defense system of mine is, actually, another satellite
Hear me out.

SLAMS; Space-Land-Air-Missile-Shield.

My system is not the exact same.

We attach 1 SLAMS satellite to every KSS

It's not only for Nuclear Missiles. ICly, it was mainly designed to put a stop to nuclear threats against the Grand Empire, but was also found effective against any and all types of missiles. Not gonna use this against Tomahawks headed for my fleets; they have their own countermeasures. SLAMS is used only for ASATs and ICBMs.

Also, because I'm sure people are going to look at it and click it, here you go: Rods From God.

The rods are made of Tungsten, and on their tip is a heat shielding material, most likely reinforced Carbon-Carbon. On the back of the rods is a rocket motor, which fires once the rod has separated from the satellite. The motor powers the rod to a speed of 36,000 feet per second (360 miles per minute, 21,600 per hour), and sends the rod into Earth’s atmosphere, eventually smashing into the crust. The rods are twenty feet long and one foot in diameter.
This, coupled with the speed, causes the crust to crack, spewing dirt and tearing up the ground as the shockwave travels, which is known to cause earthquakes.

[Xanixi]

Maybe it would have the impact force of a nuclear explosion, the difference being that all of that energy goes into the ground, giving you a downright pathetic destructive radius. The idea is that the energy exerts the very moment it impacts the ground, which then picks up the dirt and everything above it in a massive shockwave So, at best, you'll get the destructive capabilites of a cruise missile for something that costs wayy more than a ballistic missile If I understood it correctly, you mean to say that the rod is a ballistic missile. It's not. Its a massive rod made of tungsten with a rocket attached to it. , and probably has a CEP greater than it's destructive radius (and this is with whatever lulzy rocket booster you have). It serves literally no point, and no mater what Anti-ASAT countermeasures you employ to stop them, someone could just spam cheaper ASAT missiles until they knock your satellites out of the sky Just made a new post explaining the countermeasures.. There's also the cost of moving these systems into space, moving and probably constructing the firing platforms in space the firing platform is a satellite. That can be constructed on Earth. Like the rest of them., moving and possible constructing the defensive constalation in space, and ressupplying these systems They're unmanned, and have solar cells.. By the time this is all done, you've just wasted trillions of dollars to get a system that has no strategic or tactical value.

As for professionalism, godrods are, in the most professional terms possible, complete and utter shit.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

to equal that. Can you do those measurements? What would a tungsten rod, 20 feet in length, 1 foot diameter, weigh?

About 447,600 cm³, which would have it weigh in at 8,600 kg, or 8.6 tons. Assuming it only costs $1000 to put a kilogram of something in space (it doesn't, it costs far more), you are spending $8,600,000 to put one rod in space. Honestly just invest in a SSBN and load it with cruise missiles and nukes.

[Dolmart]

Godrods are pure and utter shit and should never be used or even considered for use, ever.

Except for first strike capability. Ya know, ICBMs take over 30 minutes (giving ICBMs to hit and are unbelieveably detectable, when a rod with no rocket fuel or a small amount to deorbit it takes less then 10 minutes to impact the target. All of this giving the ICBM favor for the time.

I'm on the side for rods from god, but I recogonize that it is pure stupidity to use it unless you have a non-rocket space launch mechanism, which was possible since the space race (although they are all expensive, on the scale of billions of USD). Rockets have a cost of $7000/KG into orbit, while a star-tram costs $40 or less. Unfortunately, these systems can be stopped by an EMP, because it is powered by electricity. Use star-tram, and you can send those rods up for $344 000 each. Not bad, I suspect nukes are still more economically viable.

Also, one can reasonably design one that explodes before it impacts like a controlled Tunguska event. As for the argument that the energy goes down, I've looked at the problem and there is an argument that the rods will be ineffective because the energy goes up, not down, therefore creating an explosion on the surface while doing nothing of value for the destruction of bunkers.

Before you guys yell at me like you did at the other guy, keep in mind that I'm still learning about these systems and how everything works. If you can redirect me to more sources of information, please do.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

It is a member of the subfamily Velociraptorine, not a Velociraptor. Calling all Veloceraptorine Velociraptors is like calling all Homininae Humans. Just a note, the Homininae subfamily includes gorillas. And I will be damned if I am tossed in with gorillas like we are the same species. My ancestors worked hard not getting killed and managing to reproduce, resulting in the current traits I carry. Damn hard.

Taken from that page.
Subfamily: †Velociraptorinae
Barsbold, 1983

Type species
Velociraptor mongoliensis



Taken from the human page.
Homo sapiens
Linnaeus, 1758

Subspecies
†Homo sapiens idaltu
Homo sapiens sapiens

Underlined the important part. You are confusing subspecies and subfamily. Subfamilies are really large groups, and calling all members of a subfamily by the name of a single species in it is just wrong.

[Velociraptors]

Taken from that page.
Subfamily: †Velociraptorinae
Barsbold, 1983

Type species
Velociraptor mongoliensis



Taken from the human page.
Homo sapiens
Linnaeus, 1758

Subspecies
†Homo sapiens idaltu
Homo sapiens sapiens

Underlined the important part. You are confusing subspecies and subfamily. Subfamilies are really large groups, and calling all members of a subfamily by the name of a single species in it is just wrong.

taxon is usually assigned a rank when it is given its formal name. The basic rank is that of species. The next most important rank is that of genus: when an organism is given a species name it is assigned to a genus, and the genus name is part of the species name. The third-most important rank, although it was not used by Linnaeus, is that of family.

Therefore, species is the widest group.
Family is the most specific group. (?)

[Lubyak]

My system is not the exact same.

We attach 1 SLAMS satellite to every KSS

It's not only for Nuclear Missiles. ICly, it was mainly designed to put a stop to nuclear threats against the Grand Empire, but was also found effective against any and all types of missiles. Not gonna use this against Tomahawks headed for my fleets; they have their own countermeasures. SLAMS is used only for ASATs and ICBMs.

So your response to anti-satellite weapons is...another satellite? That uses an unknown mechanism to shoot down ballistic missiles?

So what happens when I shoot down that satellite? Not to mention, you've spent even MORE money launching more satellites.

I notice you're taking things from EndWar, and while I do enjoy that game the missile shield in that game is not exactly realitic MT. You can't just say, 'well it's perfect in game, so it's perfect here!' nothing is perfect.

Also, because I'm sure people are going to look at it and click it, here you go: Rods From God.

-snip-

You...you...you're quoting a video game for the effectiveness of a weapon. You do know that video games are VERY rarely the definition of 'realistic' right? The effects of the Kinetic Strike in the game are NOT going to be the same in the real world.

[Lubyak]

I didn't. Bwitain didn't ask if having the satellite is effective, he asked if it was possible.

You're justifying your weapon with a lot of stuff about how you've 'taken care of' anti-satellite weaponry. Thus, questioning how you take care of the greatest threat to your weapons is a perfectly valid question.

It's like responding to a weak air-defense system by saying 'oh, well I've taken care of aircraft'

In the event that I am capable of protecting the satellite from ASATs, It would be a satellite carrying weapons. Orbital weapons, strong or otherwise, are always an advantage. Even when exposed.

Why? Because they're orbital which makes them sci-fi? Beacuse they're shiny?

There is nothing a god rod can do that a FAR more cheaper weapon can't. So why waste the money?

You know, you say "mystical" with such confidence. I haven't elaborated on what the defense system is because no one asked. You're the first one to. Why is it mystical if I have yet to have to answer anyone's question?

Because you've been talking ike your anti-ASAT system makes your satellites nigh invulnerable. As far as I'm concerned, that makes it mystical.

It's rocket guided. I would understand his point if it didn't, because its true. I would have never invested my time in this project if it wasn't guided. Too far a distance to hit accurately: I understand. But it is guided, and thus, worth my investment.

What's guiding them? You know that re-entering the earth's atmosphere plays merry hell with all communications, so what's guiding it?

[Xanixi]

My system is not the exact same.

We attach 1 SLAMS satellite to every KSS

It's not only for Nuclear Missiles. ICly, it was mainly designed to put a stop to nuclear threats against the Grand Empire, but was also found effective against any and all types of missiles. Not gonna use this against Tomahawks headed for my fleets; they have their own countermeasures. SLAMS is used only for ASATs and ICBMs.

So your response to anti-satellite weapons is...another satellite? That uses an unknown mechanism to shoot down ballistic missiles? ...Yeah

So what happens when I shoot down that satellite Well, uh, you destroy the mechanism? Though it'd be hard, considering the satellite was made to deal with threats like that.? Not to mention, you've spent even MORE money launching more satellites.

I notice you're taking things from EndWar Mmhm , and while I do enjoy that game As do I the missile shield in that game is not exactly realitic MT I'm not MT, PMT.. You can't just say, 'well it's perfect in game, so it's perfect here! I don't. I tend to do my research on weapons in the Real world before I deploy them here.' nothing is perfect. Oh, it's certainly not perfect. If you were to spam with a crapload of ASATs, I'm sure some would get through. But, of course, you get what you pay for, right?

Also, because I'm sure people are going to look at it and click it, here you go: Rods From God.

-snip-

You...you...you're quoting a video game for the effectiveness of a weapon No, quoting the Wiki; The Wiki gained its information from Endwar, the book. I get my information from Tom Clancy. You do know that video games are VERY rarely the definition of 'realistic' right Yes, but, If I understand correctly, Tom Clancy is as realistic as possible. If you notice, Project Thor theorized the use of a 20 foot long, 1 foot diameter tungsten rod. That's what Tom used in his book as well.? The effects of the Kinetic Strike in the game are NOT going to be the same in the real world. That's why this isn't the real world

[Urceo-Carthage]

Can someone respond to these numbers:

Total Population: 17,668,000,000
Total GDP: $596,000,000,000,000

Military population: 971,740,000 (5.5%)
Military Budget: 149,000,000,000,000 (25%)

According to the Nationstates Military Calculator, with these numbers we will spend over $153,000 per soldier, which is more than enough, considering that Marines use far lower numbers.

Once again, Will a 900 million+ military force remain technologically advanced and well trained/equipped with a 149 trillion military budget? I know 25% is a bit extensive, but it has been at 25% since the Great Valencia days, and we wish to return it.

Also, these numbers do not include the Foreign Legion.

[Xanixi]

I didn't. Bwitain didn't ask if having the satellite is effective, he asked if it was possible.

You're justifying your weapon with a lot of stuff about how you've 'taken care of' anti-satellite weaponry. Thus, questioning how you take care of the greatest threat to your weapons is a perfectly valid question. Yes, but it wasn't made. Also, I wasn't justifying, I was just taking away that threat until later. The main question was if the weapon would work to begin with. Not if the satellite would survive.

It's like responding to a weak air-defense system by saying 'oh, well I've taken care of aircraft' Except Bwitain was only asking about the weapon itself. I don't care what you think of the countermeasures it has, I didn't ask about the satellite. I asked if the weapon itself (the rod) would work.

In the event that I am capable of protecting the satellite from ASATs, It would be a satellite carrying weapons. Orbital weapons, strong or otherwise, are always an advantage. Even when exposed.

Why? Because they're orbital which makes them sci-fi Things are Sci-fi until they're made.? Beacuse they're shiny?

There is nothing a god rod can do that a FAR more cheaper weapon can't. So why waste the money?

You know, you say "mystical" with such confidence. I haven't elaborated on what the defense system is because no one asked. You're the first one to. Why is it mystical if I have yet to have to answer anyone's question?

Because you've been talking ike your anti-ASAT system makes your satellites nigh invulnerable I haven't, actually. I just disregarded the need of mentioning an anti-ASAT system. Because it wasn't what Bwit was asking.. As far as I'm concerned, that makes it mystical.

It's rocket guided. I would understand his point if it didn't, because its true. I would have never invested my time in this project if it wasn't guided. Too far a distance to hit accurately: I understand. But it is guided, and thus, worth my investment.

What's guiding them? You know that re-entering the earth's atmosphere plays merry hell with all communications, so what's guiding it? Targeting. It targets something, fires, and then humans check over the rod as it falls.

[The Kievan People]

A solid tungsten rod that size would weigh ~34 tons. But if it has a rocket booster it ain't a solid rod is it?

Tungsten won't survive impact intact at near-orbital speeds, non-negotiable. I do not know of any material that will. Rocket boosting it really, really will not help.

It would put on a nice show, vaporize anyone in the immediate vicinity, shake the ground, soil many pants etc. etc. but the actual effects on target won't be anywhere near as impressive as the sheer KE would imply. Throwing metal rods into the ground isn't a great way to destroy anything but bunkers to begin with and it's not even very good at that for reasons discussed. RL it's been realized that a ballistic missile, ideally with a maneuverable RV that can control it's speed, is a far better way of perforating bunker things than space rods from god.

[Xanixi]

A solid tungsten rod that size would weigh ~34 tons. But if it has a rocket booster it ain't a solid rod is it? Or, you know, an attachment to the rod. You know...

Tungsten won't survive impact intact at near-orbital speeds, non-negotiable I don't want it to. In fact, I want it to explode. I couldn't care less if it disintegrates. I just need the kinetic energy it picks up. I do not know of any material that will. Rocket boosting it really, really will not help. I need guidance for it. I'm not planning on the costs of getting it up there just to hope it hits where I want it to hit.

It would put on a nice show, vaporize anyone in the immediate vicinity, shake the ground, soil many pants etc. etc. but the actual effects on target won't be anywhere near as impressive as the sheer KE would imply. Throwing metal rods into the ground isn't a great way to destroy anything but bunkers to begin with and it's not even very good at that for reasons discussed. RL it's been realized that a ballistic missile, ideally with a maneuverable RV that can control it's speed, is a far better way of perforating bunker things than space rods from god It's designed, not as bunker busters, but instead, the moment it hits the ground, it exerts the kinetic energy it's picked up, throwing up dirt and everything directly above it.